Baselworld is only a few weeks away. Getting the latest news is easy, Click Here for info on how to join the Watchuseek.com newsletter list. Follow our team for updates featuring event coverage, new product unveilings, watch industry news & more!

Compared to PC, yeah these systems don't have the same prowess; but Dev's are just starting to get into their groove. same with the engines involved. They're going to want another 3-4 years before having to spend boatloads of cash to support redesigns from the ground up.

What Sony and MS need to be doing is finding ways to make development from one console to the next cheaper and more efficient. Standardizing the tools and concepts between generations would go a long way to making Dev's more happy, and providing better launches for the consoles.

Compared to PC, yeah these systems don't have the same prowess; but Dev's are just starting to get into their groove. same with the engines involved. They're going to want another 3-4 years before having to spend boatloads of cash to support redesigns from the ground up.

What Sony and MS need to be doing is finding ways to make development from one console to the next cheaper and more efficient. Standardizing the tools and concepts between generations would go a long way to making Dev's more happy, and providing better launches for the consoles.

Developers rarely (if ever) want a new console cycle. New consoles almost always arrive just as developers are finding their groove. The difference with this generation is that it took publishers time to get the financial end of the business caught up with the technology. And now that they (more or less) have, they're definitely not going to want that same sort of disruption again.

On the publisher and developer end, we can expect more outsourcing, more middleware, more small-scale development, more DLC, more subscription models, etc. Most of that has been established now, so that should all be ready for the next gen. And on the console manufacturer end, we can expect tech that doesn't substantially change the current hardware architecture. Nothing crazy new like the jump to multi-core/cell processing this generation, and more memory so that developers don't spend time/money banging their heads against the wall trying to squeeze what they can out of a very limited memory pool.

All just incremental changes that stick to the basic structures and ideas of this generation, only faster and better. There's no reason we couldn't see teaser announcements at E3 2012 for a late 2013/early 2014 launch.

Does that mean if developers are already working on games that they have their hands on a development kit? Is it common for developers to begin working on games 3-4 years before a new console is released? Seems early to me. What about the hardware specs? If developers are already working on games do they need to know the specs, and if so, does that mean that the ps4 will be far behind, spec-wise - cpu, gpu, etc when it is released? I know that the hardware industry moves super fast so when past gaming consoles were released they didn't have the latest and greatest, but I don't recall developers starting work on games 3-4 years earlier. Maybe a year or so.

Does that mean if developers are already working on games that they have their hands on a development kit? Is it common for developers to begin working on games 3-4 years before a new console is released? Seems early to me. What about the hardware specs? If developers are already working on games do they need to know the specs, and if so, does that mean that the ps4 will be far behind, spec-wise - cpu, gpu, etc when it is released? I know that the hardware industry moves super fast so when past gaming consoles were released they didn't have the latest and greatest, but I don't recall developers starting work on games 3-4 years earlier. Maybe a year or so.

I'm sure that even Sony hasn't fully nailed down what its next console's specs will be. But developers are likely able to start shooting for a "ballpark" estimate based on where Sony's R&D folks are headed. One of the reasons that early cycle games aren't as technologically impressive as late cycle games is that developers often have to start development before the specs have been finalized (so they often have to be more conservative in their tech estimates and make adjustments as the console approaches its launch specs).

Does that mean if developers are already working on games that they have their hands on a development kit? Is it common for developers to begin working on games 3-4 years before a new console is released? Seems early to me. What about the hardware specs? If developers are already working on games do they need to know the specs, and if so, does that mean that the ps4 will be far behind, spec-wise - cpu, gpu, etc when it is released? I know that the hardware industry moves super fast so when past gaming consoles were released they didn't have the latest and greatest, but I don't recall developers starting work on games 3-4 years earlier. Maybe a year or so.

They sometimes get PCs that are target systems, then early dev kits and then newer and newer ones as the specs finalize and hardware is mass produced. If they are targeting a 2013 release, then the specs are pretty firm by now.

The PS3 had the issue of being the first Cell based system, so getting Cell experience was very hard until after release when there were more dev kits. If they are going with a Cell variant, then devs have experience and getting target hardware is much simpler.

As I've said before, I want a server/client setup. One Playstation server in the basement; plus an On Live-type client extender that is little more than a roku sized puck at each TV in the house (plus the ability to connect via wifi and/or internet to my home playstation server on my android phone/tablet.

The brute force allowed for full on gaming plus the convinence of being able to do that at any display in the house without worrying about moving consoles or managing save games, etc.

As I've said before, I want a server/client setup. One Playstation server in the basement; plus an On Live-type client extender that is little more than a roku sized puck at each TV in the house (plus the ability to connect via wifi and/or internet to my home playstation server on my android phone/tablet.

The good news is that this is almost exactly what Vita is aiming to do.

The bad news is that Sony said the same thing about the PSP.

IMO we're much more likely to get some sort of cloud-console gaming hybrid setup long before any company does something like what you've imagined. It'd be too expensive and too confusing on (most) consumers' ends.

Possibly, but Apple has shown that people with little to no sense in electronics will be happy to buy tablets, ATVs, Timecasuples, airports, etc. etc. and plug them in all around their house as long as they all have the same industrial design and branding on them.

Ah, the fun time of the console cycle! Speculation and rumors on the new hardware are starting to drop at a regular basis. Here's a nice rumor article dated Sept 1, 2011:

Quote:

Remember when the PlayStation 3 had a 10-year plan? Well, the plan might be changing. An anonymous source shared a quote with me, direct from what they described as a “high-level meeting” at Sony: “PlayStation 4 in 18 months.”

Sony's official response? The tried and true "We don't comment on rumors or speculation." That's fine, because commenting on rumors and speculation is my job.

It’s no secret the Big Three always have their next hardware generation on the drawing board -- Nintendo’s likely mapped out a few post-Wii U contingencies already. That’s not what we’re talking about here. The context surrounding this information clearly applies to production, not conception. It’s less clear whether that’s an announcement window or a launch window. I’d guess the latter, since new consoles don’t land after the holiday-buying season.

Then again, a lot of things feel a bit off here. My source -- who, I hasten to add, isn't a neophyte, an outsider, a gossip, a fake, or a show-off -- remains convinced for excellent reasons, and I trust that conviction. PlayStation 4 in 18 months. Done deal.

So why am I still skeptical? Simple: Sony would be completely insane to do it.

For starters, consider what a PlayStation 4 might be. We can assume Move integration and 3D optimization. We should demand backwards compatibility...at least to cover the PlayStation 3 catalog, but I figure Sony still owes us the PlayStation 2 compatibility they promised (and yanked) years ago. A smarter Bluetooth codec -- one that seamlessly pairs with any wireless headset, for example -- would be nice, too.

I'd also speculate a PS4 that downloads or streams the majority of its titles. Thanks to Portal 2, the PS3 connects to Steam, and expanding that relationship would allow Sony to sell games for less, severely undercutting the competition. Picture Modern Warfare 3 dropping for $45 on PlayStation, $60 on every other platform. Yeah, that's an edge.

Only the PlayStation 3 can do that right now. A firmware update here and there puts everything I just mentioned in reach, save backwards compatibility. But Sony's happy to sell us remastered PS2 collections, so that's OK, right?

Beyond that, current technologies don't feasibly support the idea of a new console. High-definition 1080p is as good as it gets. It's just not possible to make games look any better yet. The Wii U ran straight into this complaint, and that's why it's a catch-up machine, not a quantum leap. It's really the best Nintendo -- or anyone -- can do at the moment.

Maybe Sony's got a faster processor, something that can run every game at the magical 60 frames per second without drops, but cross-platform developers won't play ball there. Maybe new incoming televisions will blow the current 3D-HDTVs away. Sony would be the one to know. They also know from 3D-HDTV sales that adoption rates happen slowly during big-ticket transitions...too slowly to support a console launch.

Though they might have the games to support one. We have no real idea what a full third of Sony's first-party developers are doing right now. Heavy-hitters SCE Santa Monica, Zipper Interactive, Evolution Studios, Media Molecule, and Guerilla Games all draw question marks. That's a suspiciously high ratio of locked doors and drawn curtains. No such veil of secrecy covers the five companies concentrating on PS Vita development.

And with Nintendo firing the opening salvo in the 8th Generation console war, Sony might feel obligated to return fire. But they shouldn't.

Launching a new console opens any company up to disaster. It's a dangerous time. Platforms that fail to reach critical mass can put a major dent in a corporation's finances...or even its future. Releasing expensive hardware that only offers incremental improvements sounds like a gamble nobody in their right mind would take, particularly in a soft economy resting on shaky consumer confidence. It's a very big rabbit to pull out of a fairly small hat.

Besides -- and here's my biggest reason for doubt -- the PlayStation 3 only just hit a perfect stride. It's in the zone. After years spent as the third-place also-ran, the PS3's nearly neck-in-neck with the Xbox 360. Sony finished 2010 with a major upswing in sales, and the numbers shot up again after a recent price cut. It's even possible the PlayStation 3 will shake out as the best-selling gaming system of 2011. Hell, it's dusting the Nintendo 3DS at the moment. A year ago, that would've been unthinkable. And this year's PlayStation-exclusive killer app, Uncharted 3: Drake's Deception, hasn't even released yet.

I won't say Sony walked away unscathed from the PSN hacking scandal, but I do claim that after a severely shaky start, they got their product right. It sells. The tech feels solid. The games measure up. And yet my source insists Sony plans to move on in 18 months. It just doesn't make sense to me, but then, neither did the PSP Go. They've made terrible missteps, but Sony built this hardware to last through a few technological revolutions. What a shame if it's now living on borrowed time.

PlayStation 4 in 18 months. We'll see.

I'm not sure I agree with every word but there are a couple of solid arguments in there.

The time frame he mentions puts PS4 hitting somewhere in summer 2013. My gut has been telling me holiday 2013 for a while, and I think they will have to launch around that time to beat or keep pace with MS and their schedule. As much as companies say they don't pay attention to their competitions schedules blah, blah, the moves MS and Sony make will affect each other and their launch dates.

On thing I don't agree with is that they can't introduce hardware that is upgraded current hardware. I say: Why not? Sony has already taken the cell processor to its least expensive version, so why not upgrade the systems around it and release a new console? Replace the graphics card with something modern, add a 12x BD drive, throw in 4GB ram and they've got a console that does more, better, faster, and won't cost that much. PS4 with spec numbers doubled over PS3 for $299 at launch? Yes, please.

As I've said before, I want a server/client setup. One Playstation server in the basement; plus an On Live-type client extender that is little more than a roku sized puck at each TV in the house (plus the ability to connect via wifi and/or internet to my home playstation server on my android phone/tablet.

The brute force allowed for full on gaming plus the convinence of being able to do that at any display in the house without worrying about moving consoles or managing save games, etc.

-Suntan

The idea is grand, but it can't work for timing precise games. The PSP proved this to us. The PSP games that used the PS3 for the CPU and the PSP as the video output and action input device were all but unplayable for anything that required any type of precision movement. The lag introduced by the wireless connections on both ends ruined the concept. I couldn't even play simple games like Pixel Junk Monsters --- forget anything like a fighting or timing based game.

The PSP merely used Wi-Fi 802.11-b tech to communicate with the PS3 for remote play. The level of lag from it is no doubt one reason why they never expanded on the concept, but it was a handheld that was released before the PS3 even came out.

Sony most certainly used that experience when designing the Vita for remote play functions. So just like everything else in electronics we'll see an improvement seven years after it was originally introduced.

The modern connectivity tech for the Vita is impressive: WiFi 802.11-b/g/n, 3G (optional), and Bluetooth 2.1+EDR. It is highly doubtful that remote play will be unplayable due to lag this time around.

The PSP merely used Wi-Fi 802.11-b tech to communicate with the PS3 for remote play. The level of lag from it is no doubt one reason why they never expanded on the concept, but it was a handheld that was released before the PS3 even came out.

Sony most certainly used that experience when designing the Vita for remote play functions. So just like everything else in electronics we'll see an improvement seven years after it was originally introduced.

The modern connectivity tech for the Vita is impressive: WiFi 802.11-b/g/n, 3G (optional), and Bluetooth 2.1+EDR. It is highly doubtful that remote play will be unplayable due to lag this time around.

Makes me wonder if this will be how PS Classics can be played on Vita, since it sounds like they're not playable directly on the device. I tried early on to do some remote play of old PS1 games (on disc), but as you say, it was totally useless due to lag issues. It might not be until Vita + PS4 that we get a true "remote play" experience.

The PSP was the weak link, not the PS3. No reason to think that it'll take the PS4 to greatly improve remote play with Vita.

The issue with remote play on the PS3 isn't the hardware. It's that Sony does little to encourage publishers to take advantage of it. I'm hoping that the combination of the Vita's features and a push on Sony's end to link the two devices will give them a fresh start on the whole remote play thing.

as for the ps4, i don't really care about it. today's graphics are good enough for a few more years.

Shhhh you may get bombed from all angles for expressing such an opinion on this site.

Seriously though, I'm pretty 'meh' on the next generation as well. Oh I'm sure I'll wind up with a Ps4 and an xbox *whatever*, but aside from the usual technical leaps in graphics blah blah that a new gen brings, I find myself fairly content with what this gen offers. Plus, I'm prepared to wait a few years for the consoles to mature and work out the kinks.

Not really. This has come up before and a large number of us have expressed that we are not dieing to get a new console.

-Suntan

True, but there are also a large number who question your presence on this site if you so much as 'hint' that you're content with current tech, or not ponying up for the latest tech the second it hits the shelf.

True, but there are also a large number who question your presence on this site if you so much as 'hint' that you're content with current tech, or not ponying up for the latest tech the second it hits the shelf.

Indeed. But most of those people tend to be overly vocal about their opinions while they wait for their parents to purchase the newest console and install it on the family TV in the basement